“Passepartout pulled out his big watch. "Twelve!" he exclaimed; "why, it`s only eight minutes before ten."
"Your watch is slow."
"My watch? A family watch, monsieur, which has come down from my great-grandfather! It doesn`t vary five minutes in the year. It`s a perfect chronometer, look you."
"I see how it is," said Fix. "You have kept London time, which is two hours behind that of Suez. You ought to regulate your watch at noon in each country."
"I regulate my watch? Never!"
"Well, then, it will not agree with the sun."
"So much the worse for the sun, monsieur. The sun will be wrong, then!"

After my friend gave her husband a nice watch as an anniversary gift, I tried out this idea from the thread. Indeed, she thought he was sexier than before. unfortunately he wouldn't buy her the mink coat she wanted in exchange.

tetractys wrote:OK, seriously, are there ANY watches available that have REAL sun and moon phases built in. I've NEVER seen one; only with a kind of facsimile that didn't actually work. If there was such a watch, I might even think about it!HBD, Tet

Yeah, its called an iTouch (downloaded with the right programs of course!)

Me personally, my goal is not to have to own a watch. Then again, with cellphones, I haven't worn a watch for years. Hmmm . . . . how can I buy a $5000 cellphone?

bought an ORIS automatic several years ago. Was 900$ at the time. probably slightly higher now. Runs very well; better than the OMEGA it repaced. I also have a cheap two watch winder which keeps then going when I'm not wearing one or the other
Marty

yobria wrote:The purpose of $5,000 watches to to show status within the social hierarchy. .... Personally I wish our culture could find cheaper ways to show status, elaborate head dresses for example. Then we could use resources for more rational purposes, like [pick the good cause of your choice].

Won't work. If headdresses showed status instead of watches, the title of this thread would be "Best headdress for around $5000?"

So, I scanned this thread:
1) It took a long time to scan, I am ashamed of myself that I spent this much time scanning it,the thread name was clear as to the subject so I have no excuse.
2) I miss the point of wearing a clunky looking analog watch (this includes most of the analog watches mentioned here). But to each his own.
3) On a day-to-day basis I do not wear a watch.
4) When I travel I pull out my (about) 20 year old, 20 dollar, water-resistant sport Timex Indigo with rubber watch band. It is always working and always has the correct time. I know I put in a new battery every few years but don't remember the last time. I use it as an alarm clock when needed on a trip. I can use the Indigo light to tell the time in the dark with out bothering anyone. I wore it when I recently climbed Dunn's River Falls. It takes licking and keep on ticking, metaphorically speaking of course.
5) Oh Oh, now I have to psychoanalyze myself as to why I wrote this post.

yobria wrote:The purpose of $5,000 watches to to show status within the social hierarchy. .... Personally I wish our culture could find cheaper ways to show status, elaborate head dresses for example. Then we could use resources for more rational purposes, like [pick the good cause of your choice].

Won't work. If headdresses showed status instead of watches, the title of this thread would be "Best headdress for around $5000?"

right, the whole point is an extravagant display in terms of the local culture, assuming you're trying to mate within that culture. in some cultures, the watch wouldn't mean anything, but a barn full of yams would secure the best wives. the women might even think you're an idiot for even wearing a watch, as you could just look up at the sun. to US women, a barn full of yams means little, and head dresses mean little compared to the extensive conditioning they've received for jewelry.

sschullo wrote:Car, career, property, clothes, how you verbally communicate and that wrist watch reflect social status and status is very important to some people.

right, and it's important to note that easily-noticed displays of wealth are very important. a potential mate will be able to notice these in this order:

watch > car >> property >>>>> career

so males can often achieve a mating opportunity by simply having the watch; it quickly signals the potential for having the other stuff, and some females will copulate long before figuring out they've been had, so to speak. if you go in bars, you'll find plenty of men who have the watch, and maybe the car, but probably not the career. the best strategy for women is to try to drag the interaction out long enough to surveil the situation better.

Opponent Process wrote:right, the whole point is an extravagant display in terms of the local culture, assuming you're trying to mate within that culture. in some cultures, the watch wouldn't mean anything, but a barn full of yams would secure the best wives. the women might even think you're an idiot for even wearing a watch, as you could just look up at the sun. to US women, a barn full of yams means little, and head dresses mean little compared to the extensive conditioning they've received for jewelry.

Opponent Process wrote:

sschullo wrote:Car, career, property, clothes, how you verbally communicate and that wrist watch reflect social status and status is very important to some people.

right, and it's important to note that easily-noticed displays of wealth are very important. a potential mate will be able to notice these in this order:

watch > car >> property >>>>> career

so males can often achieve a mating opportunity by simply having the watch; it quickly signals the potential for having the other stuff, and some females will copulate long before figuring out they've been had, so to speak. if you go in bars, you'll find plenty of men who have the watch, and maybe the car, but probably not the career. the best strategy for women is to try to drag the interaction out long enough to surveil the situation better.

The best strategy for women is to ask to see the yams first.

Victoria

WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. |
Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

Okay, I get it. We advertise for a woman who wants to spend money by buying a watch that advertises we have the money... for them to spend.

But what do we buy/advertise if we want a woman who is more frugal than we are? Someone who would be appalled at the thought of spending $5K for a watch... even if they/we had it. A nice suit... with no jewelry?

When I must, I wear a stainless steel Timex Indiglo, with no plan to return to anything more expensive.

sschullo wrote:Car, career, property, clothes, how you verbally communicate and that wrist watch reflect social status and status is very important to some people.

right, and it's important to note that easily-noticed displays of wealth are very important. a potential mate will be able to notice these in this order:

watch > car >> property >>>>> career

so males can often achieve a mating opportunity by simply having the watch; it quickly signals the potential for having the other stuff, and some females will copulate long before figuring out they've been had, so to speak. if you go in bars, you'll find plenty of men who have the watch, and maybe the car, but probably not the career. the best strategy for women is to try to drag the interaction out long enough to surveil the situation better.

And what if you've already got the girl and buy the watch after meeting her?

I think everyone places value on things differently and I think everyone has something they especially value. I enjoy skiing and traveling so that's where the bulk of my money goes. Say I have a friend who values watches and chooses to spend his money on watches over traveling or skiing or something else. Who am I to judge him and criticize what he values and make sweeping generalizations about why he values something different than I?

dratkinson wrote:Okay, I get it. We advertise for a woman who wants to spend money by buying a watch that advertises we have the money... for them to spend.

But what do we buy/advertise if we want a woman who is more frugal than we are? Someone who would be appalled at the thought of spending $5K for a watch... even if they/we had it. A nice suit... with no jewelry?

When I must, I wear a stainless steel Timex Indiglo, with no plan to return to anything more expensive.

Is this an advertisement?

Victoria

WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. |
Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

XtremeSki2001 wrote:And what if you've already got the girl and buy the watch after meeting her?

as long as your mate is of reproductive age, or you have access to other females of reproductive age, it's definitely worth maintaining and demonstrating your status. even monogamous species such as humans often practice serial monogamy. human males are pretty much fertile throughout their life span, and are always surrounded by fertile women. moreover, as most males accumulate more resources over time, their mating value tends to increase over time, and the opposite applies to women (where a woman's mating value is tied to fertility).

XtremeSki2001 wrote:I think everyone places value on things differently and I think everyone has something they especially value. I enjoy skiing and traveling so that's where the bulk of my money goes. Say I have a friend who values watches and chooses to spend his money on watches over traveling or skiing or something else. Who am I to judge him and criticize what he values and make sweeping generalizations about why he values something different than I?

evolutionary psychology and science in general are not interested in recording or judging values of any given species. it's about observing behavior. although I guess you could say the highest value is the ongoing recombination and transmission of genetic material. all motivations and actions lead to this end.

XtremeSki2001 wrote:... just playing devil's advocate ...

as you know scientific theories (especially those regarding something as complex as primate behavior) can rarely ever be proven. playing the devil's advocate is the most reliable method of discovering any truth in all the noise.

The Hatter was the first to break the silence. 'What day of the month is it?' he said, turning to Alice: he had taken his watch out of his pocket, and was looking at it uneasily, shaking it every now and then, and holding it to his ear.

Alice considered a little, and then said 'The fourth.'

'Two days wrong!' sighed the Hatter. 'I told you butter wouldn't suit the works!' he added looking angrily at the March Hare.

'It was the BEST butter,' the March Hare meekly replied.

'Yes, but some crumbs must have got in as well,' the Hatter grumbled: 'you shouldn't have put it in with the bread-knife.'

The March Hare took the watch and looked at it gloomily: then he dipped it into his cup of tea, and looked at it again: but he could think of nothing better to say than his first remark, 'It was the BEST butter, you know.'

Alice had been looking over his shoulder with some curiosity. 'What a funny watch!' she remarked. 'It tells the day of the month, and doesn't tell what o'clock it is!'

'Why should it?' muttered the Hatter. 'Does YOUR watch tell you what year it is?'

'Of course not,' Alice replied very readily: 'but that's because it stays the same year for such a long time together.'

'Which is just the case with MINE,' said the Hatter.

Alice felt dreadfully puzzled. The Hatter's remark seemed to have no sort of meaning in it, and yet it was certainly English.

Opponent Process wrote:evolutionary psychology and science in general are not interested in recording or judging values of any given species. it's about observing behavior. although I guess you could say the highest value is the ongoing recombination and transmission of genetic material. all motivations and actions lead to this end.

An interesting alternative to ponder seriously is that an Aristotlean ethics is compatible with modern biology given the immanent teleology of biology that does not require a cosmic teleology.

The fullest and most compelling development of this idea of which I am aware is found in the scholarship of Larry Arnhart. His books are clear and concise and his blog stimulating. Found here.

I did a quick search and didn't find any posts there on expensive watches, so perhaps we are far afield.

“The difference between Plato and Aristotle is that Aristotle believes that biology, as a mediation between knowledge of the inanimate and knowledge of man, is available” –Leo Strauss, from correspondence with Kojeve.

Who cares what Petrocelli or anyone else purchases with their own money? You can't take it with you, and after saving for retirement, paying taxes, providing for your children and family, what are you supposed to do with money? I think some Bogleheads have figured out how to "take it with you" after death.

If you want to learn more about watches and get opinions from "watch guys" below is a good forum. I am a bit of watch guy myself, but would never pay over about $300 for one. I have one sporty/casual stainless steel watch (Tissot), and one "beater" watch for washing my car and stuff like that (Casio G-Shock).

Opponent Process wrote:
right, the whole point is an extravagant display in terms of the local culture, assuming you're trying to mate within that culture. in some cultures, the watch wouldn't mean anything, but a barn full of yams would secure the best wives. the women might even think you're an idiot for even wearing a watch, as you could just look up at the sun. to US women, a barn full of yams means little, and head dresses mean little compared to the extensive conditioning they've received for jewelry.

If your goal is to mate with a woman and you have $5,000 to spend, I can think of many much more effective ways to do it than by buying a watch. Yams are also inefficient, due to the aforementioned unfavorable exchange rates across cultures. For starters, you could just pay one.

Marginally more seriously, I would recommend investing in a gym membership, a guitar, and maybe some cooking lessons before the watch. Girls love a guy with big biceps who can sing and feed them.

Last edited by daydreamin on Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I can understand the humor in the piece. But any 20-yo who comes to the BHs looking for advice must instinctively be aware that he will not always be 20 and his beer-fueled youth is not permanent. In other words, he did not show up here by accident. He came here searching for the investing wisdom to help him feather his future family's nest while riding out economic storms.

So welcome any 20-yo who comes to learn. Let him learn enough to understand, and then return to his youthful party. When he is ready to invest for his future, he will know where to return. He may not be able to invest today as the BHs advise, but he will have the beginning knowledge of those who have walked the conservative investing path before him.

For the 20-yo who does not know to plan for his future, he too will have his reward... only sooner. It may be a shiny new car, nicer apartment, unlimited mobile Internet access, ....

daydreamin wrote:I would recommend investing in a gym membership, a guitar, and maybe some cooking lessons before the watch. Girls love a guy with big biceps who can sing and feed them.

this is partially true, no question. but you're also talking about mating in a 21st century environment. environments evolve much more quickly than brains, and men/women are still using subcortical mechanisms for mating opportunities, for the most part. whether future generations will evolve towards the "enlightened man" you describe remains to be seen, but I doubt it. the evidence suggests that people with gym memberships are not breeding as well as people with bling-bling. the bling-bling is a more robust fitness indicator (maybe not as accurate, but that's not the point) leading to more reproduction along those lineages.

also, in some cases, maybe she'll take your home-cooked cuisine and serenade, but she's probably shagging the other guy, and ideally his strategy is to get you to raise his offspring. mate poaching is big in avian species, but also occurs in primates. take a room full of humans who think they know who their daddy is and some percentage of them will be wrong.

thekro wrote:I have a 1972 rolex submariner that I bought many years ago to use when I went scuba diving. It really doesnt keep as good time as Quartz Movement watches. I hardly ever wear the rolex because it is heavy and not really comfortable...

Is that the model James Bond favored... in the books... because he could slide it up over his hand and use it like a set of brass knuckles?

Is James bond used a set of brass knuckles? It's a coincidence that we have the same weapon.

This is my watch, almost 2 carats of diamonds by versace. Get the one with the scratch resistant glass and ceramic band. I've had mine for a few years and it has 0 scratches on it and I wear it everyday. Its around $5,000 or less nowadays maybe.

It runs on the motion of your body like a rolex. Pay a little extra and get the version that has the scratch resistant glass and ceramic band (scratch resistant also). I've had it for 3 years and I wear it daily and it doesnt have a scratch on the glass or the band at all. The only negative is if you take it off for a few days the hands will stop just like a rolex.

I have the precise current time available on:
my cell phone,
the face of my car stereo,
the television,
my home desktop computer,
my stovetop,
my bedroom alarm clock,
even a ball point pen,
my laptop,
my netbook,
my digital A/C thermostat,
the timer on my lighting controller,
the microwave,
my organizer,
the dozens of corporate desk chotskies that I've gathered from various events,
the bank clock as I drive by,
the radio station announcer telling me,
my GPS,
the wall of the office I visit, and of course from *you*

-- i.e., what a nice excuse to perform the almost unheard of act of actually interacting with another human being, by asking them for the time. You can even try to impress me by telling me about your $5,000 wrist watch, if you like. I've got a lot of fun toys I can buy with that $5,000 I saved!

the Submariner SS with date and black face looks the best IMO. it's one of the most popular Rolex watches, the easiest to accurately copy, and one of the longest copied - hence, the replica makers have its reproduction down to a science. the specs/details listed look good too. $114.50 seems like a reasonable price.

disclaimer - i do not advocate or condone the buying or selling of a replica watch.

I actually got a replica GMT the other day - it's beautiful and you'd never know the difference. I won't post pics because I'm sure it's against the rules, but it's nice.

NUTS! I use my cell phone for the last 12 years for checking time. The only watch I ever bought before that cost me $15. BTW, I got handed down a Seiko from my Dad or Grandad, but I don't remember what happend to it or when I lost it. Wrist watches as family assets are an overhyped notion. I am not that sentimental. Besides, who wants to carry an additional thing on your wrist. I like mine free and clear.